Trump

Cliffy6745

https://twitter.com/KellyO/status/754018229274705924

Thirty Bills Unpaid

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Jason P said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Jason P said:

I think he has a chance. Hillary is not a good candidate. Twice she should have cake-walked to the nomination, but got beat once and had a socialist give her a run for the money this year, which will cost her votes.

Of course he has a chance. A decent one at that. I just can't see it happening given the reasons I mentioned above, among many others.

Considering a good portion of the population is trying to catch Pokemon with their phones, anything is possible.

Hahahaha

and two of them in California fucking fell off a cliff doing it. unbelievable. probably drumpf supporters!

You've got to be kidding.

https://www.facebook.com/topic/Encinitas-California/109680939058152?source=share&tr=1468698101&pnref=story

I should never have doubted you.

PJ_Soul

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Here is Pence signing the hate bill. Seriously....look at the fucking douchebag.

Good god. I don't think it is possible to be surrounded by a more out of touch group of people.

Yeah that whole picture looks like some sort of doucheapolooza.

it shouldn't even be legal for an American Governor to bring that much religion into his politics. This is so fucked up.

Agreed. I hear the fear of Muslim immigrants wanting Sharia law enacted, and I'm of course opposed to that, but then I see this, and wonder what the difference is. Any time religious people can wield a pen and enact laws I'm nervous, since I think religion and reason are antithetical.

Absolutely, and you're right, there is no difference between this and Sharia law. Of course, never ever underestimate the hypocrisy of a very religious person. It knows no bounds.

I made the argument a few weeks ago that Sharia law already exists in this country, but in the form of Halakha for the Jews in places like New York. It was not a well received argument by a few people.

That is because no one is currently terrified of Jews, lol.... If history is any indication though, the hatred towards Jews will rise again, some day, just as soon as all the Muslims are irradicated and there is opportunity to redirect the hate again.

But anyway, I do not support any religious practices/beliefs that oppress girls/women. It makes me sick to my stomach. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, whatever. All of these religious beliefs/practices/traditions that serve to keep women subservient or attempt to dictate to them what they have to do with their bodies or their lives, or that give them fewer rights in their community, disgust me 100%. Everything that can be done to discourage or prevent these practices/beliefs/traditions (and brainwashing of course) should be done.

BS44325

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Here is Pence signing the hate bill. Seriously....look at the fucking douchebag.

Good god. I don't think it is possible to be surrounded by a more out of touch group of people.

Yeah that whole picture looks like some sort of doucheapolooza.

it shouldn't even be legal for an American Governor to bring that much religion into his politics. This is so fucked up.

Agreed. I hear the fear of Muslim immigrants wanting Sharia law enacted, and I'm of course opposed to that, but then I see this, and wonder what the difference is. Any time religious people can wield a pen and enact laws I'm nervous, since I think religion and reason are antithetical.

Absolutely, and you're right, there is no difference between this and Sharia law. Of course, never ever underestimate the hypocrisy of a very religious person. It knows no bounds.

I made the argument a few weeks ago that Sharia law already exists in this country, but in the form of Halakha for the Jews in places like New York. It was not a well received argument by a few people.

It wasn't well received by me but to be clear I don't support the accommodation for Halakha as well. The only difference at the moment is that one system tilts towards violence while the other does not. That being said if it is more equitable to stop the accommodation of both then I would be on board.

mrussel1

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Here is Pence signing the hate bill. Seriously....look at the fucking douchebag.

Good god. I don't think it is possible to be surrounded by a more out of touch group of people.

Yeah that whole picture looks like some sort of doucheapolooza.

it shouldn't even be legal for an American Governor to bring that much religion into his politics. This is so fucked up.

Agreed. I hear the fear of Muslim immigrants wanting Sharia law enacted, and I'm of course opposed to that, but then I see this, and wonder what the difference is. Any time religious people can wield a pen and enact laws I'm nervous, since I think religion and reason are antithetical.

Absolutely, and you're right, there is no difference between this and Sharia law. Of course, never ever underestimate the hypocrisy of a very religious person. It knows no bounds.

I made the argument a few weeks ago that Sharia law already exists in this country, but in the form of Halakha for the Jews in places like New York. It was not a well received argument by a few people.

It wasn't well received by me but to be clear I don't support the accommodation for Halakha as well. The only difference at the moment is that one system tilts towards violence while the other does not. That being said if it is more equitable to stop the accommodation of both then I would be on board.

None are sanctioned but the question is about the steps to eradicate, but also the degree to which these 'courts' are radical (in the eyes of the Western world). As I pointed out, many are related to custody, child support, property rights, etc. They certainly would run counter to established case law in our courts, but many choose to adjudicate in the traditional venues. Maybe the definition of 'freedom' includes the choice to allow a person of your religion or religious tradition to judge.

But PJ_Soul brings up the good point that many oppress women and they are not in a strong position to escape, without destroying their support structure, homes, etc.

josevolution

Cliffy6745 said:

Also, someone should probably go check on Christie

He's probably downing phiilicheese stake subs as we speak this was his last shot at any kind of prevelancy there is no way he get another term as governor ...

Jason P

josevolution said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Also, someone should probably go check on Christie

He's probably downing phiilicheese stake subs as we speak this was his last shot at any kind of prevelancy there is no way he get another term as governor ...

He will be our new secretary of education!

josevolution

Jason P said:

josevolution said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Also, someone should probably go check on Christie

He's probably downing phiilicheese stake subs as we speak this was his last shot at any kind of prevelancy there is no way he get another term as governor ...

He will be our new secretary of education!

Really I had him pegged to do something in food industry he's the perfect spokesperson for how to go around with a stomach for an armrest ...

PJ_Soul

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Here is Pence signing the hate bill. Seriously....look at the fucking douchebag.

Good god. I don't think it is possible to be surrounded by a more out of touch group of people.

Yeah that whole picture looks like some sort of doucheapolooza.

it shouldn't even be legal for an American Governor to bring that much religion into his politics. This is so fucked up.

Agreed. I hear the fear of Muslim immigrants wanting Sharia law enacted, and I'm of course opposed to that, but then I see this, and wonder what the difference is. Any time religious people can wield a pen and enact laws I'm nervous, since I think religion and reason are antithetical.

Absolutely, and you're right, there is no difference between this and Sharia law. Of course, never ever underestimate the hypocrisy of a very religious person. It knows no bounds.

I made the argument a few weeks ago that Sharia law already exists in this country, but in the form of Halakha for the Jews in places like New York. It was not a well received argument by a few people.

It wasn't well received by me but to be clear I don't support the accommodation for Halakha as well. The only difference at the moment is that one system tilts towards violence while the other does not. That being said if it is more equitable to stop the accommodation of both then I would be on board.

I agree that the "tilt" towards violence definitely needs to matter.... that said, I am unaware of any Sharia communities in North America that actually have a tilt towards violence as far as terrorism goes (i assume it does mean a tilt towards violence against women). Do any? Or is that just an assumption?

PJ_Soul

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Here is Pence signing the hate bill. Seriously....look at the fucking douchebag.

Good god. I don't think it is possible to be surrounded by a more out of touch group of people.

Yeah that whole picture looks like some sort of doucheapolooza.

it shouldn't even be legal for an American Governor to bring that much religion into his politics. This is so fucked up.

Agreed. I hear the fear of Muslim immigrants wanting Sharia law enacted, and I'm of course opposed to that, but then I see this, and wonder what the difference is. Any time religious people can wield a pen and enact laws I'm nervous, since I think religion and reason are antithetical.

Absolutely, and you're right, there is no difference between this and Sharia law. Of course, never ever underestimate the hypocrisy of a very religious person. It knows no bounds.

I made the argument a few weeks ago that Sharia law already exists in this country, but in the form of Halakha for the Jews in places like New York. It was not a well received argument by a few people.

It wasn't well received by me but to be clear I don't support the accommodation for Halakha as well. The only difference at the moment is that one system tilts towards violence while the other does not. That being said if it is more equitable to stop the accommodation of both then I would be on board.

None are sanctioned but the question is about the steps to eradicate, but also the degree to which these 'courts' are radical (in the eyes of the Western world). As I pointed out, many are related to custody, child support, property rights, etc. They certainly would run counter to established case law in our courts, but many choose to adjudicate in the traditional venues. Maybe the definition of 'freedom' includes the choice to allow a person of your religion or religious tradition to judge.

But PJ_Soul brings up the good point that many oppress women and they are not in a strong position to escape, without destroying their support structure, homes, etc.

And the majority if women in those communities wouldn't even try to escape because most of them are brainwashed from birth into believing that their ways are the ways of God. They will often defend the oppression of women almost as vigorously as the men would. They contribute to the oppression of their own daughters.

BS44325

PJ_Soul said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Here is Pence signing the hate bill. Seriously....look at the fucking douchebag.

Good god. I don't think it is possible to be surrounded by a more out of touch group of people.

Yeah that whole picture looks like some sort of doucheapolooza.

it shouldn't even be legal for an American Governor to bring that much religion into his politics. This is so fucked up.

Agreed. I hear the fear of Muslim immigrants wanting Sharia law enacted, and I'm of course opposed to that, but then I see this, and wonder what the difference is. Any time religious people can wield a pen and enact laws I'm nervous, since I think religion and reason are antithetical.

Absolutely, and you're right, there is no difference between this and Sharia law. Of course, never ever underestimate the hypocrisy of a very religious person. It knows no bounds.

I made the argument a few weeks ago that Sharia law already exists in this country, but in the form of Halakha for the Jews in places like New York. It was not a well received argument by a few people.

It wasn't well received by me but to be clear I don't support the accommodation for Halakha as well. The only difference at the moment is that one system tilts towards violence while the other does not. That being said if it is more equitable to stop the accommodation of both then I would be on board.

I agree that the "tilt" towards violence definitely needs to matter.... that said, I am unaware of any Sharia communities in North America that actually have a tilt towards violence as far as terrorism goes (i assume it does mean a tilt towards violence against women). Do any? Or is that just an assumption?

It's not that the Sharia community itself has the "tilt" per se but it is within those communities that the most radical teachings fester. So the attitude towards women, gays, jews etc. that is taught under strict sharia inadvertently creates a breeding ground for those who choose to commit violence. The teaching/attitude becomes the canary in the coal mine so to speak. The theory is if you confront the ideology then the small percentage who would use it as a reason for murder will not have the environment to grow.

Gern Blansten

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/15/trump-was-reportedly-calling-people-at-midnight-asking-if-he-could-change-vp-pick.html

Word of Trump's indecision adds credence to claims that Trump's inner circle was divided over the VP appointment, with reports circulating that top aide Paul Manafort was in favor of Pence while influential son-in-law Jared Kushner was in favor of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was also among the finalists on the shortlist.

Trainwreck

Jason P

Outside of Vatican City, the only national based religious legal systems are Islamic. On a scale of bad, Pence is a 1 and those nations are a 10 on the scale of horrible outcomes. Signing a law that could prevent a person from getting served a slice a pizza is not quite as bad as getting sentenced to 350 lashes for having a glass of wine.

PJ_Soul

Jason P said:

Outside of Vatican City, the only national based religious legal systems are Islamic. On a scale of bad, Pence is a 1 and those nations are a 10 on the scale of horrible outcomes. Signing a law that could prevent a person from getting served a slice a pizza is not quite as bad as getting sentenced to 350 lashes for having a glass of wine.

I am not sure what your point is. Is it that we should have very low standards because things are even shittier elsewhere?
Pence is not a 1, but even if he were, the only reason he isn't at least a 6 is because he has not been able to pull it off, what with the pesky laws and whatnot.

Bentleyspop

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Here is Pence signing the hate bill. Seriously....look at the fucking douchebag.

Good god. I don't think it is possible to be surrounded by a more out of touch group of people.

Yeah that whole picture looks like some sort of doucheapolooza.

it shouldn't even be legal for an American Governor to bring that much religion into his politics. This is so fucked up.

Agreed. I hear the fear of Muslim immigrants wanting Sharia law enacted, and I'm of course opposed to that, but then I see this, and wonder what the difference is. Any time religious people can wield a pen and enact laws I'm nervous, since I think religion and reason are antithetical.

Absolutely, and you're right, there is no difference between this and Sharia law. Of course, never ever underestimate the hypocrisy of a very religious person. It knows no bounds.

I made the argument a few weeks ago that Sharia law already exists in this country, but in the form of Halakha for the Jews in places like New York. It was not a well received argument by a few people.

That is because no one is currently terrified of Jews, lol.... If history is any indication though, the hatred towards Jews will rise again, some day, just as soon as all the Muslims are irradicated and there is opportunity to redirect the hate again.

But anyway, I do not support any religious practices/beliefs that oppress girls/women. It makes me sick to my stomach. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, whatever. All of these religious beliefs/practices/traditions that serve to keep women subservient or attempt to dictate to them what they have to do with their bodies or their lives, or that give them fewer rights in their community, disgust me 100%. Everything that can be done to discourage or prevent these practices/beliefs/traditions (and brainwashing of course) should be done.

Actually there are a lot of people in this country, around the world, and even on this site who hate the Jews and are afraid of the Jews as well.

BS44325

PJ_Soul said:

Jason P said:

Outside of Vatican City, the only national based religious legal systems are Islamic. On a scale of bad, Pence is a 1 and those nations are a 10 on the scale of horrible outcomes. Signing a law that could prevent a person from getting served a slice a pizza is not quite as bad as getting sentenced to 350 lashes for having a glass of wine.

I am not sure what your point is. Is it that we should have very low standards because things are even shittier elsewhere?
Pence is not a 1, but even if he were, the only reason he isn't at least a 6 is because he has not been able to pull it off, what with the pesky laws and whatnot.

Personally I am indifferent on Pence but i think the selection of him has nothing to do with a possible President Trump's intention to institute social conservative policy. Conservative judges possibly but not social conservative legislation. Trump is just not a social conservative. If anything he might be the most socially liberal candidate to ever run for president. He was certainly far more vocal on gay rights/marriage in the 90's while Bill Clinton was passing the Defence of Marriage Act and instituting Don't Ask Don't Tell. That's just a fact. Pence is mainly there to help navigate issues between the White House and congress. Trump has zero clue as to how government functions on a logistical level and Pence's experience in congress will certainly help with that. Trump will set policy and Pence will help steer it through congress. It is nothing more then that.

mrussel1

^^all true, but it's likely an attempt to assuage the social conservative activists, not just Congress. But your point on Congressional liaison is dead on.

rgambs

BS44325 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Jason P said:

Outside of Vatican City, the only national based religious legal systems are Islamic. On a scale of bad, Pence is a 1 and those nations are a 10 on the scale of horrible outcomes. Signing a law that could prevent a person from getting served a slice a pizza is not quite as bad as getting sentenced to 350 lashes for having a glass of wine.

I am not sure what your point is. Is it that we should have very low standards because things are even shittier elsewhere?
Pence is not a 1, but even if he were, the only reason he isn't at least a 6 is because he has not been able to pull it off, what with the pesky laws and whatnot.

Personally I am indifferent on Pence but i think the selection of him has nothing to do with a possible President Trump's intention to institute social conservative policy. Conservative judges possibly but not social conservative legislation. Trump is just not a social conservative. If anything he might be the most socially liberal candidate to ever run for president. He was certainly far more vocal on gay rights/marriage in the 90's while Bill Clinton was passing the Defence of Marriage Act and instituting Don't Ask Don't Tell. That's just a fact. Pence is mainly there to help navigate issues between the White House and congress. Trump has zero clue as to how government functions on a logistical level and Pence's experience in congress will certainly help with that. Trump will set policy and Pence will help steer it through congress. It is nothing more then that.

If that we're true, Newt would have been a MUCH better choice. He was one of the most effective legislators Republicans have ever had, and makes Pence look like a B-lister.

I'm glad though that we agree Trump has no clue how governance actually works.

PJ_Soul

Bentleyspop said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

jeffbr said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Here is Pence signing the hate bill. Seriously....look at the fucking douchebag.

Good god. I don't think it is possible to be surrounded by a more out of touch group of people.

Yeah that whole picture looks like some sort of doucheapolooza.

it shouldn't even be legal for an American Governor to bring that much religion into his politics. This is so fucked up.

Agreed. I hear the fear of Muslim immigrants wanting Sharia law enacted, and I'm of course opposed to that, but then I see this, and wonder what the difference is. Any time religious people can wield a pen and enact laws I'm nervous, since I think religion and reason are antithetical.

Absolutely, and you're right, there is no difference between this and Sharia law. Of course, never ever underestimate the hypocrisy of a very religious person. It knows no bounds.

I made the argument a few weeks ago that Sharia law already exists in this country, but in the form of Halakha for the Jews in places like New York. It was not a well received argument by a few people.

That is because no one is currently terrified of Jews, lol.... If history is any indication though, the hatred towards Jews will rise again, some day, just as soon as all the Muslims are irradicated and there is opportunity to redirect the hate again.

But anyway, I do not support any religious practices/beliefs that oppress girls/women. It makes me sick to my stomach. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, whatever. All of these religious beliefs/practices/traditions that serve to keep women subservient or attempt to dictate to them what they have to do with their bodies or their lives, or that give them fewer rights in their community, disgust me 100%. Everything that can be done to discourage or prevent these practices/beliefs/traditions (and brainwashing of course) should be done.

Actually there are a lot of people in this country, around the world, and even on this site who hate the Jews and are afraid of the Jews as well.

Well obviously- I am just talking about where American attention is pointing right now. Clearly it far outweighs any antisemitism that is going on at the moment.

PJ_Soul

rgambs said:

BS44325 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Jason P said:

Outside of Vatican City, the only national based religious legal systems are Islamic. On a scale of bad, Pence is a 1 and those nations are a 10 on the scale of horrible outcomes. Signing a law that could prevent a person from getting served a slice a pizza is not quite as bad as getting sentenced to 350 lashes for having a glass of wine.

I am not sure what your point is. Is it that we should have very low standards because things are even shittier elsewhere?
Pence is not a 1, but even if he were, the only reason he isn't at least a 6 is because he has not been able to pull it off, what with the pesky laws and whatnot.

Personally I am indifferent on Pence but i think the selection of him has nothing to do with a possible President Trump's intention to institute social conservative policy. Conservative judges possibly but not social conservative legislation. Trump is just not a social conservative. If anything he might be the most socially liberal candidate to ever run for president. He was certainly far more vocal on gay rights/marriage in the 90's while Bill Clinton was passing the Defence of Marriage Act and instituting Don't Ask Don't Tell. That's just a fact. Pence is mainly there to help navigate issues between the White House and congress. Trump has zero clue as to how government functions on a logistical level and Pence's experience in congress will certainly help with that. Trump will set policy and Pence will help steer it through congress. It is nothing more then that.

If that we're true, Newt would have been a MUCH better choice. He was one of the most effective legislators Republicans have ever had, and makes Pence look like a B-lister.

I'm glad though that we agree Trump has no clue how governance actually works.

Yeah, exactly. Pence wasn't chosen to help navigate anything. He was chosen because Trump and whatever idiots are advising him think that Pence will help them draw back the more right wing Republicans and the Bible thumper who got scared that Trump isn't religious enough. The fanatical thumper make up a pretty big section of the right if we're just talking who actually votes and who has influence in certain areas/states. While Trump is a wacko, he was still missing the appeal to a big specific group of even bigger wackos - The Tea Partiers and the zealots. Now he's got them, lol.